The gap this fills is simple: those who just want a flashy arch installation to post on socials. These people have no concerns about quality because they haven’t used Linux extensively and aren’t using their OS for genuine work.
'The world continuing to go on' is the status quo and has been for millenia at this point. Sure, the argument can be made that the world will end eventually, but if we do not have our reference timescale, what do we have? People aren't afraid that the world will eventually end (because 'eventually' should be thousands of years from now), people are afraid the world will end NOW, which does nullify your experience and efforts on the subjective human timescale. Life as we know it continuing to go on without ambiguity on our confidence to prevent world-ending events does resolve those anxieties.
I am a big fan of using it when working with somewhat complicated toolchains, especially if they need to be compiled. Cleaning up the file system is as simple as deleting the container and starting a new one. OCaml on windows comes to mind.
As I said in an above comment, nobody with sense is going to claim lead is healthy. I’m just saying CR could just as easily come up with the same findings for other foodstuffs. Obviously change needs to happen but this doesn’t seem like it will do any good.
I think we can all agree on that, but it still seems like CR's article is a bit reactionary considering it is normal to find some levels of lead in most FDA regulated foodstuffs?
Many commentors point out that CR's guideline for daily intake is arbitrary and well under the FDA guideline. I think it would be good to take this with a grain of salt and will be interested to see the response from Huel.
I think this correlates more to individual culture and interest in general computing than anything else. As you said yourself, the 'lost programmer' isn't curious, isn't interested in the details. They are interested in getting their specific tasks done and collecting a paycheck. Many may have ended up in a field they are not excited about. That's not something you can fix.
As an aside, it will only get worse as the technical implementations get easier. Probably a lot of AI generated SQL queries being put into prod nowadays.
Visual studio is the only real alternative, for full featured IDE, yes. It is about as useful as Rider imo, but the analyzers and general UX are lacking
Somehow I doubt telecom infrastructure in NYC is susceptible enough to completely drop service citywide when under attack from one DDoS source. In fact, I suppose this is technically just DoS, because all these SIMs should be served by 1, maybe 2 towers.
What are you trying to say with this, that you disagree, or that it's an intelligent perspective afforded to those who are not hopeless? I don't see how anyone can disagree that the aggregate actions of your parents, your locality, your culture, your nation, play the largest role in the cards you are dealt from the beginning.
As someone recently starting (and coming near the end of) the Culture series, I oftem find myself thinking about the course of action humanity might choose if AGI is reached. Frankly, I think the popular sentiment and path of least resistance will be 'let the Minds handle everything' a la Culture.
I think the big assumption that this article hinges on is that AI will never create durable code. That cannot be true. Now that we’ve finally got a taste of the singularity, humans will never stop trying to bring about AGI, which by definition must write code that is exponentially more durable than anything a human could write. The question is ‘when’.
While kind of tangential, I’d like to say the Culture novels do, in fact, largely follow stories of humans with complete agency over their destinies, and often human choices almost entirely shape the story. Minds do take a large role, in some novels more than others(Excession of course being almost entirely dependent on the decisions of Minds).
With that said, I don’t think it’s realistic to assume we would ever choose a Federation style society without widespread use of AI. The value proposition of AGI is too high. I don’t know if Roddenberry genuinely didn’t expect AGI to be realistic or if he chose to omit it as a stylistic choice(leaning towards the latter because of Data).